Arkansas Court Orders All Disputed Cannabis Signatures Counted

Arkansas Supreme Court Orders State to Count 18,000 Disputed Signatures for Medical Cannabis Ballot Measure

The Arkansas Supreme Court has intervened in a heated legal battle surrounding a proposed amendment to expand the state’s medical marijuana program. The court has ordered the Secretary of State to resume counting approximately 18,000 disputed signatures for Issue 3, a ballot measure aimed at enhancing access to medical cannabis. This ruling comes as a preliminary injunction, significantly boosting the chances for the measure to appear on the November ballot.

Court Decision Bolsters APA’s Fight for Ballot Inclusion

The ruling was in response to a lawsuit filed by Arkansans for Patient Access (APA) after Secretary of State John Thurston declared that the group fell 2,664 signatures short of the required number to qualify for the upcoming election. APA accused Thurston of refusing to count signatures collected during the cure period, a time allotted for campaigns to gather additional signatures after the initial submission.

On Wednesday, the Arkansas Supreme Court stepped in, instructing Thurston to “immediately begin verifying the (~18,000) remaining signatures submitted during the cure period until the 90,704 threshold or just beyond is met.” Thurston was given until Friday to file a report on the verification process. This decision was seen as a significant victory for APA, which had argued that thousands of valid signatures were being unfairly disregarded due to administrative technicalities.

Dispute Over Signature Certification Practices

The crux of the dispute revolves around the certification of signatures. Thurston’s office had refused to count the signatures submitted during the cure period, citing state law requirements that certification documents be signed by the sponsors of the measure, not by representatives from canvassing companies. APA, however, argued that delegating these duties to agents has been a long-accepted practice in Arkansas.

“It would be fundamentally unfair for the secretary’s newly ‘discovered’ position to be imposed on APA at the eleventh hour of the signature collection process,” the group stated in its court filing, according to the Arkansas Times. APA maintains that it followed proper procedure and that the Secretary of State’s rejection of their signatures was an arbitrary decision aimed at keeping the measure off the ballot.

APA Confident About Valid Signature Count

In its legal petition, APA requested that all submitted signatures be counted, expressing confidence that they would meet the required number to qualify for the ballot. “We are confident that well more than 5,000 of those will be deemed valid once counted,” said Bill Paschall, a member of APA.

APA’s attorney, Stephen Lancaster, criticized the Secretary of State’s actions, accusing the office of attempting to suppress the will of the voters. “This is a clear attempt to thwart the will of the people. Thousands of voters’ voices are being silenced by arbitrary technicalities,” Lancaster said, as reported by the Arkansas Advocate.

Ongoing Legal Proceedings and Political Intrigue

The legal battle is moving swiftly, with the Arkansas Supreme Court ordering all parties to submit briefs by October 7. The expedited timeline underscores the urgency of resolving the issue before the November election. For supporters of the medical marijuana amendment, time is of the essence, as the outcome of the case will determine whether votes on Issue 3 will be counted.

The case has taken on additional political intrigue with the recusal of Chief Justice Dan Kemp and Associate Justice Courtney Hudson. Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders, who has ties to Protect Arkansas Kids, an anti-marijuana group that has joined the lawsuit, is tasked with appointing replacements. This has raised concerns about potential political influence in the case, particularly since Protect Arkansas Kids opposes the expansion of the medical marijuana program. The group is expected to challenge the ballot title and the popular name of the amendment, although specific objections remain unclear at this point.

This development adds a layer of complexity to an already tense legal battle, with supporters of the measure fearing that political motivations could impact the court’s final ruling.

Attorney General Backs Ballot Disqualification

Attorney General Tim Griffin has publicly supported Thurston’s decision to disqualify the disputed signatures, arguing that state laws governing ballot initiatives must be followed strictly. “Our laws protect the integrity of the ballot initiative process,” Griffin said in a statement reported by the Associated Press. He emphasized the importance of ensuring that sponsors, not their agents, sign key documents to prevent potential confusion or violations of legal responsibilities.

Griffin’s office argues that requiring sponsors to personally sign certification documents ensures that paid canvassers are properly informed about their duties and the legal requirements for collecting signatures. This, they claim, helps maintain the integrity of the overall ballot initiative process, and they are prepared to defend this stance in court.

Implications for Arkansas’ Medical Cannabis Program

If approved, Issue 3 would represent a significant expansion of Arkansas’ existing medical marijuana program, which was first established in 2016. The proposed amendment would broaden the range of medical professionals authorized to certify patients for cannabis use, expand the list of qualifying conditions, and extend the validity of medical cannabis cards from one year to three years.

For many patients, these changes would mean easier access to medical cannabis and less frequent renewals of their eligibility. However, the legal dispute over the signatures has left the future of the amendment uncertain.

Although Issue 3 will still appear on the ballot due to certification deadlines, the counting of votes will depend on the final ruling of the Arkansas Supreme Court. If the court ultimately sides with APA and validates enough of the disputed signatures, the amendment could officially pass, bringing significant changes to the state’s medical marijuana program. If not, the initiative will be effectively nullified despite being listed on the ballot, preventing voters from having a final say on the issue.

A Precedent-Setting Legal Battle

The Arkansas Supreme Court’s decision to order the state to continue counting the disputed signatures marks an important moment in the ongoing debate over medical marijuana in the state. With the fate of Issue 3 hanging in the balance, the court’s ruling will not only impact the cannabis community but could also set important legal precedents for future ballot initiatives in Arkansas.

As the case progresses, the tension between patient advocates, political opponents, and state officials continues to grow. All eyes are now on the Arkansas Supreme Court as the state awaits its final decision, which will determine whether voters will have a chance to expand medical marijuana access come November.